The evil analogies of Renaud Camus
After the introduction of family reunification in 1976, immigration changed in nature and France changed its face. Settlement immigration has taken over from labor immigration and, as Elisabeth Badinter wrote on the faith of the edifying and terrifying testimonies collected by Georges Bensoussan in A submissive France : "A second society is trying to impose itself insidiously within our Republic, turning its back on it, explicitly aiming for separatism, even secession. " Renaud Camus makes the same observation. It is heartbreaking for him to know that so many French people live in Saint-Denis, Sevran, La Courneuve, Lunel and Tourcoing and even in certain parts of Paris, as in a foreign land. But at the moment of naming things, he succumbs, like the ideologues he fights, to the demon of analogy. Antifascists invoke the dark years to better deny what happens. He refers to it to make it feel enormity and horror. He protests against the Occupation, he castigates the Collaboration, he calls for the Resistance. This is where I radically separate myself from him. As I wrote in my argument with Élisabeth de Fontenay, if one wants to avoid pouring into the inhuman, one has to keep oneself as the plague of all comparison with the dark times of the XXe century and strive to think the present in its own terms: accuracy, again and again.
This argument, I developed it in front of Renaud Camus himself in my show "Replicas". He was opposed to Hervé Le Bras. To speak of Occupation, I told him in essence, is to consider all Arabs and all Africans crossed in the street as invaders: "You say that hate is a feeling that is foreign to you, but your analogy belies this beautiful proclamation because, as Albert Camus writes in an address delivered during a meeting organized by the French Friendship, salle de la Mutualité March 15, 1945 "For four years, every morning, every Frenchman received his ration of hatred and his bellows. It was the moment he opened the newspaper. " The word Occupy arouses the image of Nazism, and what was more legitimate, more necessary, more salutary, even than to hate the Nazis? " Renaud Camus remained deaf to this objection.
It has even since then increased its analogy of a fourth term. After the Occupation, Collaboration, Resistance, here is the genocide. "The genocide of the Jews was probably more criminal, but still seems a little small arm with the global replacement"he tweeted. With this word, the link that the thought of Renaud Camus still has with reality, breaks. Genocide is the physical destruction of a people. The Nazi genocide is the industrial killing of Jews and Gypsies. Nothing of the kind threatens Europe these days. The very people who, like Youssef al-Qaradawi, want to explicitly Islamize Europe, do not want the extermination of the infidels, but their conversion, or, to use Houellebecq's words, their "submission". As to "Global substitution", which Renaud Camus sees at work and which consists in particular in wanting to compensate by immigration for the declining fertility of the countries of Europe, he proceeds from the universalization of the idea of the like. This is because no difference is definitive, insurmountable, absolute, that anyone can do anything. With the transformation of humanity into "Undifferentiated human matter"it can be said that democracy, or, more precisely, the democratic vision of the world, has given birth to a monster, but this monster is not genocidal. For what makes genocide thinkable, and therefore possible, is the contestation of the unity of the human species, it is the fact of seeing in the other man another than man. For Hitler, the great heresy is to believe, precisely, that individuals are interchangeable. Between the Jews and the Aryans, there is no common measure, and for the Aryans to be able to deploy their being, Jews must disappear from the surface of the Earth.
If replacing, as Renaud Camus thinks, is the central gesture of postmodern societies, then it means that they are also, and definitely, posthitlerian. I suffer from having to recall such evidence, but I suffer even more to see Renaud Camus go astray in this way. And his non-readers, who reproach me so vehemently for my ties with him, would be wrong to rub their hands, for this misplacement does not give them reason. For them, everything is simple, everything is clear: this guy is a bastard and he does not need to know his work to know that each page testifies to his ignominy. Well no, they are mistaken in pleading on what is a real tragedy the comfortable categories of melodrama. The ignorant who overwhelm him bury alive a great writer and such is the tragedy: this one brings them their help; with his analogies and his shortcuts, he digs his grave, he is himself his own gravedigger. He seeks, with strong words, to wake up his dazed compatriots, he wants to provoke a start. Result: it causes a gagging even among the most clairvoyants. He founded two parties, the Party of Innocence and the Party of NO, to gather all those who do not want to see France become something else than herself, and he has never been so isolated. The more he calls for union, the more he empties him. He does not cry in the desert, he creates the desert by his cries.
And I know that Sense, Praise of appearance, Horla dog's life, Decivilization, Inheriters are major works, I read with pleasure, with interest, with admiration, each volume of the Journal, I am inaudible now when I say it: Renaud Camus surrounded his big books with a wall of crazy tweets, that more no one, soon, will want to cross. His anguish is legitimate, his thought profound. So why is he so relentless in making this anguish and thought odious? Why, as soon as we start listening to him, does he manage to stop us from doing so? What demon leads him to push the cap too far? It would take a novelist to solve this riddle.
I can only say that my infinite sadness to see the author of Residences of the spirit to cut oneself off from all those who could have and had to read it by writing that "The genocide of the Jews is a little small arm with the global replacement". I wish he had made my case. I would have liked to be listened to or heard from him. But if, as I wrote to Elizabeth de Fontenay, he lives in my heart because it is a noisy forum and very agitated, it is clear that I do not live in his. But by the way, is his inner self a forum? I'm not sure of it. I see it rather as a dungeon where his thought sometimes brilliant, sometimes delirious, endless soliloquy.
And here is legal action against Renaud Camus for apology or contestation of crimes against humanity by SOS Racisme, the Union of Jewish Students of France and the Interministerial Delegation to fight against racism, antisemitism and hatred anti-LGBT ... All the justintrudesque stupidity of our time is contained in this last name.
The words of Renaud Camus are indefensible, the word "Little arm" is absurd and atrocious, but one can not under any circumstances accuse Renaud Camus of denialism or apology for crimes against humanity since it says very explicitly that the genocide of the Jews was "More criminal" than what is happening today. In short, this statement does not fall under the jurisdiction of the courts. Anti-racist associations have for a long time replaced reflection with the judicial reflex. Impatient to punish, they do not know how to criticize anymore. This task therefore falls to me, and to me almost alone, because unlike the "assos", I am not itchy with the envy of the criminal and, because, unlike most of my peers, "Nerds," I know who and what I'm talking about.
Having not seen Philip Roth since the celebration of his eightieth birthday, four years ago, I began to find the time long. So I took my courage in both hands I phoned him, he was available, I jumped on a plane, and he appeared to me at the same time serene - because after thirty-one books and some masterpieces, he feels the duty accomplished - and melancholy, because if the work of the work is an exhausting struggle, idleness is not very easy to live, nor, no doubt, the feeling that time is counted on you. But perhaps these impressions are projections. I was careful not to extract confidences from Philip Roth, we talked about things and others, and, above all, about "Tsunami"as said New York Times, triggered by the Weinstein case.
We have mentioned in particular the case of Dustin Hoffman, who allegedly "Inappropriate behavior", almost half a century ago, who did not even remember, but who apologized, and Leon Wieseltier, a famous journalist and essayist, that women working with him accuse him of"Aggression", but D'"Sexual obsession". He would have forced one of them to look at the photograph of the sculpture of a naked woman and asked her if she had ever seen such an erotic image. Leon Wieseltier was preparing to launch a very ambitious intellectual journal, IdeaBut faced with this avalanche of revelations "#metoo", the widow of Steve Jobs, who funded the project, has stopped everything. And the author of Kaddish joined in hell Harvey Weinstein, Dustin Hoffman, Kevin Spacey, comedian Louis CK, convinced of exhibitionism, and also Elie Wiesel, because the new inquisition does not even leave the dead in peace. Philip Roth was not aware of this latest scandal. I told him what I had just learned, he immediately lit his tablet, he typed the name of the deceased great deceased and he came across an article he read to me and we commented together: "Elie Wiesel woman claims sexually assaulted her" ("A woman claims that Elie Wiesel sexually assaulted her"). "When I was 19, Jenny Listman writes, Elie Wiesel "grabbed my ass". " ("Elie Wiesel put my hand in my ass.") And there, fasten your belts, it's Night and Fog : "He took me for an ultra-orthodox minor girl, so he chose to molest a defenseless person who was not in danger of complaining. "
It was in 1987, during a charity gala, a photographer took a family shot. " The Holocaust survivor » first got hold of Jenny Listman's shoulder, then he lowered that wandering hand up to his back, and just as the photographer "Took the picture", he reached the buttocks and he pressed her - "He squeezed it! " His package completed, he fled and he disappeared. Jenny Listman then lists the After effects of this fatal gesture and of the ethical questions that he has created in her. She talks about her suicidal depression and panic attacks that lasted eighteen years. These are all his bearings that have collapsed. The "Bad behavior" of a man considered a secular saint has made him lose confidence in humanity ...
Why is she talking today? Because she could no longer protect the world from "Something bad and ugly" ("Something evil and ugly"). The burden of this secret was too heavy to bear, and she uses the very words of Elie Wiesel when he took the world to witness the horror to which he had survived: "Listen to us with all your energy! " It is not, therefore, her "pig" that Jenny Listman swings, after such a long and painful silence, it is her executioner. One evening in November 2017, in an apartment on the Upper West Side in Manhattan, Philip Roth and I, took note, dumbfounded, of this momentous event: the shoaisation of the hand in the ass. Medusa, but not completely caught off guard. In 1981, I had just met Philip Roth and I realized with him, in London, an interview for The new observer. I asked him in particular what had been the reception in America of My life as a man, novel that I loved. He told me that this book had earned him his misogynistic reputation, and that he had sold himself badly, because in 1974 the world had discovered that women are good and only good, persecuted and only persecuted, and he had portrayed a persecuting woman: it ruined everything! In 2017, in the eyes of some exalted feminists and the media that follow suit, women are more than ever victims, they are even on the verge of taking the throne of the absolute victim.
To say of Elie Wiesel that he did the Evil after having suffered it himself, is to imply that there are two supreme, imprescriptible crimes: genocide and sexual harassment, this concept encompassing all There is a little shaggy, a little wild, a little energetic in the relations between men and women. Questioned by the newspaper The world On the occasion of the honorary award given to her in Los Angeles, Agnès Varda had this word: "Humiliation is always on the side of women. " There would not, then, be sexed reports of men scorned, of men humiliated, of men turned into drunkards and reduced to despair. There would be no domineering women, no Machiavellian women, no ferocious or even frenzied women. Medea, Lady Macbeth and the Blue Angel would be like Philip Roth's Maureen, pure misogynistic fantasies. The stupidity is progressing by leaps and bounds and it will soon purge our literary and artistic heritage of all that contests its great Manichean supremacy.
Edwy Plenel is delighted with "The revolution triggered by the Weinstein affair". Once again, the director of Mediapart strays. The feminist revolution has already taken place. Women in the Western world are freer than they have ever been. Their body belongs to them, their life belongs to them, the street belongs to them and procreation without men is about to become a woman's right. There are, of course, the very real facts of violence and abuse of power. These actions deserve no indulgence and must be repressed without weakness. It is also necessary to protect children and adolescents against pornography, this image of a sexuality freed from all the rituals of seduction and which is now offered on the internet as an introduction to love life. The conquests of civilization are fragile. But the problem of the current campaign is that it denies the very existence of these conquests and that it intends to repair the immemorial wrongs done to women by a frenetic McCarthyism victim. Will we wake up one day from this trance?